Use my Search Websuite to scan PubMed, PMCentral, Journal Hosts and Journal Archives, FullText.
Kick-your-searchterm to multiple Engines kick-your-query now !>
A dictionary by aggregated review articles of nephrology, medicine and the life sciences
Your one-stop-run pathway from word to the immediate pdf of peer-reviewed on-topic knowledge.

suck abstract from ncbi


10.1016/j.apmr.2021.02.002

http://scihub22266oqcxt.onion/10.1016/j.apmr.2021.02.002
suck pdf from google scholar
33617864!7894071!33617864
unlimited free pdf from europmc33617864    free
PDF from PMC    free
html from PMC    free

Warning: file_get_contents(https://eutils.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/eutils/elink.fcgi?dbfrom=pubmed&id=33617864&cmd=llinks): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 215

suck abstract from ncbi

pmid33617864      Arch+Phys+Med+Rehabil 2021 ; 102 (7): 1283-1293
Nephropedia Template TP

gab.com Text

Twit Text FOAVip

Twit Text #

English Wikipedia


  • Delivering Virtual Cancer Rehabilitation Programming During the First 90 Days of the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Multimethod Study #MMPMID33617864
  • Lopez CJ; Edwards B; Langelier DM; Chang EK; Chafranskaia A; Jones JM
  • Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2021[Jul]; 102 (7): 1283-1293 PMID33617864show ga
  • OBJECTIVE: To describe the adaptations made to implement virtual cancer rehabilitation at the onset of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, as well as understand the experiences of patients and providers adapting to virtual care. DESIGN: Multimethod study. SETTING: Cancer center. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 1968 virtual patient visits were completed during the study period. Adult survivors of cancer (n=12) and oncology health care providers (n=12) participated in semi-structured interviews. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Framework-driven categorization of program modifications, qualitative interviews with patients and providers, and a comparison of process outcomes with the previous 90 days of in-person care via referrals, completed visits and attendance, method of delivery, weekly capacities, and wait times. RESULTS: The majority of program visits could be adapted to virtual delivery, with format, setting, and content modifications. Virtual care demonstrated an increase or maintenance in the number of completed visits by appointment type compared with in-person care, with attendance ranging from 80%-93%. For most appointment types, capacities increased, whereas wait times decreased slightly. Overall, 168 patients (11% of all assessments and follow-ups) assessed virtually were identified by providers as requiring an in-person appointment because of reassessment of musculoskeletal and/or neurologic impairment (n=109, 65%) and lymphedema (n=59, 35%). The interviews (n=24) revealed that virtual care was an acceptable alternative in some circumstances, with the ability to (1) increase access to care; (2) provide a sense of reassurance during a time of isolation; and (3) provide confidence in learning skills to self-manage impairments. CONCLUSIONS: Many appointments can be successfully adapted to virtual formats to deliver cancer rehabilitation programming. Based on our findings, we provide practical recommendations that can be implemented by providers and programs to facilitate the adoption and delivery of virtual care.
  • |*Health Personnel[MESH]
  • |*Pandemics[MESH]
  • |COVID-19/*epidemiology[MESH]
  • |Comorbidity[MESH]
  • |Follow-Up Studies[MESH]
  • |Humans[MESH]
  • |Neoplasms/epidemiology/*rehabilitation[MESH]
  • |Ontario/epidemiology[MESH]
  • |Retrospective Studies[MESH]
  • |SARS-CoV-2[MESH]
  • |Telemedicine/*methods[MESH]
  • |Telerehabilitation/*methods[MESH]


  • DeepDyve
  • Pubget Overpricing
  • suck abstract from ncbi

    Linkout box